I agree one hundred percent if you cant speak english you shouldnt be in american as a AMERICAN CITIZEN. They also butcher our language the ones who try. In my school we had to do a project on ourselves and i had these mexican girl in my class this is what she said i kid you not.

i like play
i like ball
i like sister
i like fun
i like walk
i like run
i like game
i like stuff

I agree one hundred percent if you cant speak english you shouldnt be in american as a AMERICAN CITIZEN. They also butcher our language the ones who try.
I usually adore irony, but this is just painful.

Haha, I agree with both The Doc and the thread topic. It's called America for a reason, I'm sure if and American was to go to Mexico they would have to learn Spanish would they not? You don't go to Juarez and see a bunch of white guys in suits have convos in English and snickering at the Mexicans because they can't understand them.

The thing is, Mexico doesn't pride itself as "the great melting pot", or whatever you call it, the way America does. No country does. If you ask me, a country can't claim to want to be the pinnacle of cultural conglomeration and then complain when people don't speak the language.

Should people who immigrate to the US or Canada try to learn English (or French, depending on where in Canada)? Definitely, no question; assimilation, to an extent, is a necessary part of living in any foreign country. But I also think English speaking people need to make certain allowances for those who, like myself, simply aren't able to learn foreign languages with any kind of ease.

If they can make themselves understood in day to day life by the majority of the people around them without sacrificing their dignity (ie playing charades to get their point across), I say they're good to go. I do, however, draw the line at trying to communicate with English speakers in your native language, then treating them like idiots when they don't understand you. Talking louder doesn't make your language any more comprehensible to non-speakers (looking at you, Mandarin speakers T_T).

I agree one hundred percent if you cant speak english you shouldnt be in american as a AMERICAN CITIZEN. They also butcher our language the ones who try. In my school we had to do a project on ourselves and i had these mexican girl in my class this is what she said i kid you not.

i like play
i like ball
i like sister
i like fun
i like walk
i like run
i like game
i like stuff

Stinking Irony here! Speaking as an english speaker who is living in a foreign country who speak a different language. Language learning is incredibly difficult and impatient and mean people like YOU do not make learning language any easier. Especially considering the fact she is clearly trying to learn the language by being in your school. Are you so ignorant you think she is magically going to learn all the english she needs in a day?

Instead of moaning about her language perhaps you could like, you know, shock horror; help her and show compassion. That said given that you seem unable yourself to actually type english with any degree of precision, accuracy, correct grammer or capitalisation you teaching it may well not be the best of Ideas. I could of course go through all the errors in your post if you want?

*Apologies for any incorrect Iґs in my post such as this: ı İ - I have tried not to put them in but am using a foreign keyboard.

No offense GODKING, but the Mexican(though it's probably best to use Latin American unless she is a Mexican Citizen) is at least making an attempt at learning the language. The thread topic is about people who make no attempt at learning the language. Also, when you trash someone for not speaking American English well, you should verify that you are using it correctly.

As for your theoretical: You must not have been down to Cabo San Lucas. You see that happen at many cantinas, and quite frankly, we Americans tend to be the ones making fun of people who don't speak English in THEIR OWN COUNTRY.

As for the "Melting Pot" from The Doctor: When you place many things in a melting pot they lose their individuality and become a part of the whole. That means WE incorporate things from their culture, not that we change ourselves to fit their needs.

Interestingly enough, I was talking with a guy at work who apologized about his poor English. I said in my thick southern drawl, "It's no problem. Yer English is a hell of a lot better than my Bulgarian."

It's called America for a reason

Ah sweet, proud America, fatherland of the Americanese-speaking peoples.

As for the "Melting Pot" from The Doctor: When you place many things in a melting pot they lose their individuality and become a part of the whole. That means WE incorporate things from their culture, not that we change ourselves to fit their needs.
If I understand you right, you're saying that only foreign elements melt down and become part of the whole. That's not a "melting pot", that's assimilation. In a melting pot metaphor, all elements should break down and mingle with each other to form a whole that's hopefully greater than the sum of its parts. That means that when some people fail to, for example, learn the country's most common tongue, the rest would theoretically change to accommodate them.

Unless you're saying that English language, values, literature, etc. are the actual pot that does the melting itself. Which, while it does render most of what I've just said moot, raises whole other questions and concerns about what I understood to be the ideals of American society that just may belong in another thread entirely.

If I understand you right, you're saying that only foreign elements melt down and become part of the whole. That's not a "melting pot", that's assimilation. In a melting pot metaphor, all elements should break down and mingle with each other to form a whole that's hopefully greater than the sum of its parts. That means that when some people fail to, for example, learn the country's most common tongue, the rest would theoretically change to accommodate them.

Unless you're saying that English language, values, literature, etc. are the actual pot that does the melting itself. Which, while it does render most of what I've just said moot, raises whole other questions and concerns about what I understood to be the ideals of American society that just may belong in another thread entirely.
Not quite. We incorporate their language into our own. For example. "Que pasa" is added to the american "Dude" We meld aspects of other languages into our own. It becomes part of the whole. Aspects of German Spanish Italian and varied other languages have melted together with English to help form the American English and slang that we use.

What you are saying is that rather than melt, they can be stubborn and make the pot melt to fit them.

Not quite. We incorporate their language into our own. For example. "Que pasa" is added to the american "Dude" We meld aspects of other languages into our own. It becomes part of the whole. Aspects of German Spanish Italian and varied other languages have melted together with English to help form the American English and slang that we use.

What you are saying is that rather than melt, they can be stubborn and make the pot melt to fit them.
You misunderstand me. I'm not saying that they should be allowed to be stubborn and not learn English simply because they don't want to. They should attempt to do so for the sake of everyone around them as well as their own. I believe I said as much. However, I also feel that concessions must be made for people who simply can't learn languages as well as others. The melting pot can't start bitching and moaning when something that just can't melt all the way is dropped in. It has to live with it without trying to push it out again.

If it don't melt, then it isn't part of the melting pot. This isn't a stew we're talking about. Yes, it's more like assimilation(not bad like Borg assimilation). They conform to OUR country since they came here. If I move to France, I am EXPECTED to learn French. They are not expected to learn English(though unlike the US where we only focus on ONE FRIGGIN LANGUAGE their kids are taught multiple languages). If I move to Mexico, I am EXPECTED to learn Spanish.

Do I think that we should only be taught one language? No. I believe that in order to be a world wide competitor, we should be brought up with multiple languages in our schools. HOWEVER, no language should be given preferential treatment(save English, our primary language) in schools.

Has this been posted yet? If not, here's the obligatory xkcd:

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/national_language.jpg)

Has this been posted yet? If not, here's the obligatory xkcd:

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/national_language.jpg)

Yeah. I have a native-American friend. He tried that with me. I said, Ya should have fought harder for your language. That's why we're fighting so hard for ours NOW"

Yeah, wait till those Latinos get horses and gunpowder. Then you're all screwed.

Yeah, wait till those Latinos get horses and gunpowder. Then you're all screwed.

Nope, we will just wait for them to take a nap then attack. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_San_Jacinto) Texans may not know when to run, but we do know when to fight. ;)

Yeah. I have a native-American friend. He tried that with me. I said, Ya should have fought harder for your language. That's why we're fighting so hard for ours NOW"

Is that serious?

Yeah. I have a native-American friend. He tried that with me. I said, Ya should have fought harder for your language. That's why we're fighting so hard for ours NOW"

This is a joke right? You had guns the Indians generally had arrows, and they were fighting for their land, their culture, their way of life and ultimately their lives. I think all of that is both somewhat harder and more serious than if English is the first spoken language. Nor do I really think the Native Americans had any chance of winning, which means that regardless of how hard they fought they would have lost. I don't think anyone could of fought harder (or dirtier) than the Japanese in WWII and they still lost....

Yeah. I have a native-American friend. He tried that with me. I said, Ya should have fought harder for your language. That's why we're fighting so hard for ours NOW"

How do you not fall down more?

Meh you'd have had to been there. And know how we tease each other. Not to mention I am part Shoshone(very small... like great great great grandmother). He also teases me about how my house is built on his ancestral land. We joke with each other about all of that stuff. He is after all a friend. He likes to point out that the Native Americans were pretty crafty. They got us to kill ourselves and give them all our money(tobacco and casinos).

And mimartin: Yer talkin about that time Texans decided to stay and fight(rather than run) at that little mission in San Antonio aren't you? Ya know... Remember the Alamo

I'm the first one to be against racism. I think that calling names based on the colour of your skin, or where you were born, is absolutely wrong, and one of the greatest and most detrimental tendencies of human society. It's disgusting and ignorant, and I believe that ardently. That, however, does not stop me thinking that people that live in this country need to learn how to speak, read, and write english. The fact of the matter is, we're the only country in the world without an official language that people have to learn to live here. It's a dangerous precedent to have lining a basic foundation of our society: being able to communicate with each other. How is infrastructure supposed to sustain itself in any sense if we can't do that?

I don't agree with hateful campaigns about it, tinged with racism, like this one is, but we can't be afraid to strengthen ourselves as a nation for that reason alone. Far less racist countries than ourselves have national languages. Canada, a country with one of the most open immigration policies anywhere, has two: French and English, which are chosen by each province based on the population. And I understand that some people might have learning deficiencies when it comes to a new language, so certain concessions, or possibly rectifications, should be made for them. That said, a standard needs to be put in place nevertheless. So my proposal is, be ashamed of this politician, but keep in mind that the core of what he wants to do is important. We just have to scrape away the rhetoric.

Having an official language doesen't mean everyone has to speak it, IIRC South Africa has 12, doesen't mean everyone is expected to speak Zulu or even Afrikaans. Countries with official languages, shockingly enough, can just as easily acomodate people who don't speak the oficial language(s). This is partly because the fact that a language is official doesen't neccesarily grant it any major advantages other languages don't get, heck sometimes it only means you have a right to get official documents in your language.

Therefore, making a language official doesen't in itself enable people to communicate, and indeed often ends up with a lot of regulation that I guess many here find excessive.

Also, making english official opens the door for other languages to petition for the same status. Some, like tribal languages, can make essentially the same arguments they made to get special rights. Others like spanish, can argue that it deserves it based on its number of speakers (especially in some cities, and states). The beauty of no official language, if you want english to be dominant, is that since it is the most spoken language by far, it has an easier time dominating an "open market". Just like corporate laws has hampered microsoft and benefitted apple, so could official language status hamper english and help other languages.

True enough, but we have to do something that requires language minority citizens to learn the basics of English. The amendment in 1975 to the Voting Rights Act of 1965 already set a precedent. Nobody, as of now, has to learn English to do anything in this country. In fact, if they live in a district with less than 50% English literacy, and 5% of the population is a language minority, they don't even have to learn English to vote. History and comparative politics teach us that a country with a region that speaks a different language than the language that the country's government is built on is almost bound to secede from that country eventually.

That means that the American southwest, which has a very large Spanish speaking population, might very well decide to break off from the US, much like the Quebecois threaten to do in Canada. I think it would be kind of sad if, given all our other problems, that the crumbling of the United States started in earnest because of a lack of a central, unifying language.

Proliferation of a different language need not really signal the rise of nationalism. It's only important that Washington make room for a different language.

Both India and China do fine while having dozens of languages within their borders. And while I don't know about China too well, in India, you'll find different official languages for different states. The official languages of the Centre are English and Hindi, and (sensibly enough), to participate in the national parliament, one would have to be fluent in either language. Other than that, millions of people get by living without knowing either English or Hindi.

It's definitely possible to have a country with a multitude of languages within it, the question is whether the English-speakers would be willing to tolerate them or not.

the question is whether the English-speakers would be willing to tolerate them or not.Not if they get the words to the National Anthem wrong....:usa:

Well we could use sign language with one another, as a universal language. That's how some of the tribes in the U.S., use to communicate with each other, once upon a time. Of which they called it the "Plains Sign Language" for intertribal communication.

As a matter of fact, we have already developed a few signs in sign language - like the middle finger sign to express our gratitude to each other. :D

It's definitely possible to have a country with a multitude of languages within it, the question is whether the English-speakers would be willing to tolerate them or not.
I imagine that actually encountering the other of different languages would make a lot of people less scared of them. I spent a significant part of my childhood around North Wales, the idea of people speaking Welsh as a first language is something I find utterly unperplexing and unproblematic. However, as you've pointed out, there must be an official language and -- especially in a place as densely populated as, for example, the UK -- I think it's fairly important that everyone is fluent in that, both for reasons of 'national identity' and for ease of communication.

You'll have to excuse me if any of this is incoherent: I'm typing this off the back of a coffee-fuelled all-nighter.

Not if they get the words to the National Anthem wrong....:usa:
I read somewhere that Jefferson had the rather crazed idea of making Old English the official language of the United States, as given the large numbers of German speakers it seemed like a good compromise to make: English, but with stronger grammatical rules, as in German. The way things could have (absolutely not, not in a million years, no one was mad enough to do this) been.

As it was he did found the University of Virginia, which is one of the bastions of Anglo-Saxon studies, of course.

I've always found a curious feature of his rhetoric to be the appeal to the rather English myth of Anglo-Saxon liberty (I have no idea if this is something still present in the American psyche: I suppose you have the mythologising of American liberty to supply its place). The British Empire always supplying the role of the Normans to his Hengest and Horsa (who, rather appropriately, were mythical ur-colonists themselves).

Proliferation of a different language need not really signal the rise of nationalism. It's only important that Washington make room for a different language.

When does making room become losing entire areas of the country to a different language? It's not a question of open mindedness, but striking a balance. If we don't behave with some form of tolerance, then yes, secession has a good chance of happening. However, if we open the floodgates far too much, the very relevant Spanish speaking population of the US might very well contest English as the most important language in the country. I have a problem with that, mainly because of two reasons:

1. The country's identity, the ideas it was founded on, and the constitutional bedrock that our society was built on, are all written in English. We are very much, when it comes to our heritage, an English-speaking country. If we abandon that foundation, I feel as if something would be lost to our culture. After all, according to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, most aspects of who we are as a people are decided upon by the central language we speak. We didn't start with a multitude of languages on equal grounds, we started with one dominant language, and everything was built from that.

2. I don't think any language is in any sort of shape in this country to demand that it be an official language. The majority of our population has horrendous capability with English, Spanish, or any language, primarily because of the poor public education programs for them, poorly trained teachers who don't focus on a more articulate type of writing skill, and a fundamental lack of importance invested in them in both the popular, and, yes, academic world. It may just be because I am an English major, but if I hear one more mathematician scoff at English as easy, or a waste of time, I may just have to punch him.

Really, to strike a balance between languages, the populace needs to be able to actually speak at least one of them. But maybe that's just me being a stickler.

Anyway, to recapitulate, taking a firm stand on some aspects of English literacy in a political setting is just as important as being tolerant. I think it'd be a mistake to ignore or even underscore cases like Quebec, which has been given all the rights it has wanted in regards to its language, within reason, yet still desires secession in some form. Language barriers, regardless of political acceptance, can tear apart a nation.

Language barriers, regardless of political acceptance, can tear apart a nation.

Welcome to Belgium Politics! :nut:

Welcome to Belgium Politics! :nut:

Yeah, I hear you have a tough time getting stuff done. I mostly know that because it was the weakness that Farage used to attack Rompuy's supposed political designs for the European "nation-states" in the EC a few months back, so I had no idea that language had something to do with it. Please, elaborate.